Link is to artwork created by Googles AI program. I read the link, still have no idea at all what it is "doing" to create the art. Seems to me much the same might be made by having Photoshop apply various filters in random order and see what pops out?

I do wonder what norm of the program is? Specific images like we have here.... or are most of them a random mush?

Hmmmmmm..... which do I prefer: the indecipherable process of Google AI, or the "Bad Art" created by Hoomans? Each has its appeal.... as does oil slicks on water.

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.Asking: What is the most good for the most people?Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

So, when the very cultured tell you: "You don't understand Art."==do you, as I do, agree?

Kurt Vonegut: "Art is a conspiracy between rich people and artists to make poor people think they are dumb." //// Read it once, can't forget it. From Slaughterhouse Five, I think. About 5-6 lines from that book stay with me: "Billy was as spastic in space as he was in time." Can't write better than that.....................and that is "art" too.

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.Asking: What is the most good for the most people?Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

I extremely strongly disagree with that. An individual's understanding of art is 100% subjective so it's not possible to misunderstand it.

Also, that Google deep dream image in the opening post is great. It's much better than most deep dream images I've seen. It must have gone through a lot more iterations than other deep dream images.

If that is a deep dream image - it is one for fishies, or maybe frogs. As a human, my deep dream images have long legs, voluminous protuberances, magical curves, and a seductive smile. ( If you know what I mean...)

I extremely strongly disagree with that. An individual's understanding of art is 100% subjective so it's not possible to misunderstand it.

Also, that Google deep dream image in the opening post is great. It's much better than most deep dream images I've seen. It must have gone through a lot more iterations than other deep dream images.

If that is a deep dream image - it is one for fishies, or maybe frogs. As a human, my deep dream images have long legs, voluminous protuberances, magical curves, and a seductive smile. ( If you know what I mean...)

Oh, one of these.

funny-octopus-cartoon-smiling-illustration-44111329.jpg

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

I extremely strongly disagree with that. An individual's understanding of art is 100% subjective so it's not possible to misunderstand it.

Also, that Google deep dream image in the opening post is great. It's much better than most deep dream images I've seen. It must have gone through a lot more iterations than other deep dream images.

Ha, ha......you said "extremely" when the subject is art. Lets name and connect a few dots: I said "No, I don't understand art when responding to the very cultured, then I quoted with implied approval the great Kurt Vonnegut. Did you consider the apparent conflict????

Maybe.......................... my response.......................... was to avoid an argument with the very cultured, with whom I often strongly disagree, and my value system is not to argue with idiots about art.........................because .................... its mostly subjective. I say mostly because like all other things, including the subjective, there are certain points of near universal agreement. Eg: Guernica is not about dead horses.

You sound a bit cultured yourself.....................ha, ha.

Its mostly ..... just words.

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.Asking: What is the most good for the most people?Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

What I don`t understand... is why people would pay good money for it. Clearly they have more to spend than I do; a different set of priorities, etc.

People pay good money for art for the reasons which have got nothing to do with the purely aesthetic value of art. It's all a money scam, a form of investment, the way to park some immense fortunes.

Investing in art is more profitable than almost any other kind of investment. A guy with a few millions to spare doesn't want to put it in the bank at the negative interest rate. Instead he buys Van Gogh, puts in a bank vault for a couple of years, then sells it for a big profit without even looking at the goddamn thing. That's business and that's why some stupid {!#%@} pictures which normally would hang in a dusty corner in some museum go for tens of millions of dollars.

When I feel like exercising, I just lie down until the feeling goes away. Paul Terry

Flash: right you are. My favorite is one of the Rockefellers in the middle 1900 went to Africa and bought up all the ceremonial face masks and totems he could find. Then he had the New York press tout the new and primative art of Africa and caused a huge interest in the same. Rockefeller slowly sold his warehoused pieces for x1000 mark ups.

Same with EVERY "discovered" artist.

................................................................................. Its all a scam I tells ya!!

My own view: are is BS, just as Vonnegut wrote. I think any art you buy is a corruption of the artistic appreciation and demotes it to one of commericalism and exploitation. THE WORST ARE you do by and for yourself, is better than the very best art anyone else might do. I mean: just look at most of it.

Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.Asking: What is the most good for the most people?Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?